There are two orthogonal matters here: how to standardise the PROCESS of package management, and how to standardise the CONTENT.

Does ISO C++ want to offer a source database that acts as an optional standard library extension?

I’m more interested in the second item. I think developers should be able to type at the command line something like “cpp-get std::libgraphics 1.42” and have version 1.42 of the graphics library source and all its dependencies appear in their path, unencumbered by licence restrictions, regardless of platform, ready to build and link. cpp-get should ship as standard with any implementation.

I think this is actually the harder of the two problems to solve.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 11 Mar 2018, at 13:10, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> What gets delivered depends on what your goals are. I don't we should close the door to packages that:
>
> Can't deliver source because of license restrictions.
>
> Use of binaries to reduce compile times.
>
> Slim packages that don't contain source or binaries, but instead might have references to either, or both.
>
>
>> On Mar 11, 2018 11:58 AM, "Guy Davidson" <guy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> A ten minute read that reinforces the notion that any such effort on package management should deliver source, not binaries.
>>
>> http://pfultz2.com/blog/2017/10/27/universal-package-manager/
>>
>> G
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On 11 Mar 2018, at 11:45, Guy Davidson <guy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I shall certainly be there. I can feel a crescendo about package management and I wonder if this is going to fall into our laps. For me and for the graphics paper I think that would be a good thing.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> G
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On 11 Mar 2018, at 11:20, Titus Winters <titus_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> After going back and forth on it a bit, there will in fact be a formal meeting of SG15 this week during the WG21 meeting in Jacksonville. The meeting is scheduled for this Friday evening, at 730. We're scheduled against the SG7 "Compile Time Programming" meeting, unfortunately, and I'm not quite sure what room it is in. The WG21 evening sessions page will be updated over the week with details as room assignments and the like get worked out.
>>>>
>>>> I hope that we can use this as a more detailed kick-off: what are the topics that we are interested in, and what are the outputs that we'd like to see from these discussions.
>>>>
>>>> I hope to see many of you there. And for those of you that aren't going to be present, please consider finding some time to put together a wish list this week.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> -Titus
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Tooling mailing list
>>>> Tooling_at_[hidden]
>>>> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tooling mailing list
>>> Tooling_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tooling mailing list
>> Tooling_at_[hidden]
>> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Tooling mailing list
> Tooling_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling